The gender-linked language effect: Do language differences really make a difference?

Sex Differences and Similarities in Communication: Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 211-230

  Mulac, Anthony ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84906006976     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203873380     Document Type: Chapter

References (30)

1. Cohen , J. ,& Cohen , P. (1975). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences .Hillside NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Fitzpatrick , M.A. & Mulac , A. (1995). Relating to spouse and stranger: Genderpreferential language use.. In P.J. Kalbfleisch & M.J. Cody (Eds), Gender, power and communication (pp. 213-231). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Fitzpatrick , M.A. , Mulac , A. ,& Dindia , K. (1995). Gender-preferential language use in spouse and stranger interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology , 14 , 18-39.
4. Giles , H. , Mulac , A. , Bradac , J.J. & Johnson , P. (1987). Speech accommodation theory: The first decade and beyond.. In M.L. McLaughlin (Ed), Communication yearbook, 10 (pp. 13-48). Newbury Park, CA: Sage..
5. Giles , H. , Scherer , K.R. & Taylor , D.M. (1979). Speech markers in social interaction. In K.R. Scherer & H. Giles (Ed), Social markers in speech . Cambridge, Englan d: Cambridge University Press..
6. Gudykunst , W.B. ,& Ting-Toomey , S. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication .Newbury Park CA, Sage.
7. Kerlinger , F.N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research(2nded.). New York: Holt,Rinehart & Winston.
8. Lachenbruch , P.A. ,& Mickey , M.R. (1968). Estimation of error rates in discriminant analysis. Technometrics , 10 1-11.
9. Maltz , D.N. & Borker , R.A. (1982). A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication.. In J. J. Gumperz (Ed), Language and social identity (pp. 196-216). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press..
10. McMillan , J.R. , Clifton , A.K. , McGrath , D. & Gale , W.S. (1997). Women's language: Uncertainty or interpersonal sensitivity and emotionality? Sex Roles, 3, 545-559.
11. Mulac , A. (1975). Evaluation of the speech dialect attitudinal scale. Speech Monographs, 42, 1982-1989.
12. Mulac , A. (1976). Assessment and application of the revised speech dialect attitudinalscale. Communication Monographs , 43 , 238-245.
13. Mulac , A. (1998). Language in combination-does it happen any other way? Multiplevariable analysis of gender-linked language differences.. In S. Wertheim , A.C. Bailey & M. Corston-Oliver (Eds), Engendering communication: Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley women and language conference (pp. 391-402).
14. Mulac , A. & Bradac , J.J. (1995). Women's style in problem solving interactions: Powerless, or simply feminine?. In P.J. Kalbfleish , & M.J Cody (Eds), Gender, power and communication (pp. 83-104).Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates..
15. Mulac , A. , Bradac , J.J. ,& Gibbons , P. (2001). Empirical support for the genderas-Culture hypothesis: An intercultural analysis of male/female language differences, Human Communication Research , 27 , 121-152.
16. Mulac , A. , Bradac , J.J. ,& Palomares , N.A. (2003, Nov), A general process model of the gender-linked language effect: Anticedents and consequences of language used by men and women, Meeting of the International Communication Association in San Diago, CA
17. Mulac , A. , Bradac , J.J. ,& Mann , S.K. (1985). Male/female language differences and attributional consequences in children's television. Human Communication Research , 11 , 481-506.
18. Mulac , A. , Erlandson , K.T. , Farrar , W.J. , Hallett , J.S. , Molloy , J.L. ,& Prescott , M.E. (1998). "Uh-huh. What's that all about?" Differing interpretations of conversational backchannels and questions as sources of miscommunication across genderboundaries. Communication Research of miscommunication across gender boundaries.Communication Research, 25 , 641-668.
19. Mulac , A. , Incontro , C.R. & James , M.R. (1985). Comparison of the gender-linked language effect and sex role stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 49, 1099-1110.
20. Mulac , A. & Lundell , T.L. (1980). Differences in perceptions created by syntactic-semantic productions of male and female speakers. Communication Monographs, 47, 111-118.
21. Mulac , A. & Lundell , T.L. (1982). An empirical test of the gender-linked language effect in a public speaking setting. Language and Speech, 25, 243-256.
22. Mulac , A. ,& Lundell , T.L. (1986). Linguistic contributors to the gender-linked languageeffect. Journal of Language and Social Psychology , 5 , 81-101.
23. Mulac , A. ,& Lundell , T.L. (1994). Effects of gender-linked language differences in adults' written discourse: Multivariate tests of language effects. Language andCommunication , 14 , 299-309.
24. Mulac , A. , Lundell , T.L. ,& Bradac , J.J. (1986). Male/female language differences andattributional consequences in a public speaking situation: Toward an explanation of thegender-linked language effect. Communication Monographs , 53 , 115-129.
25. Mulac , A. ,& Rudd , M.J. (1977). Effects of selected American regional dialects upon regional audience members. Communication Monographs , 44 , 185-195.
26. Mulac , A. , Studley , L.B. ,& Blau , S. (1990). The gender-linked language effect inprimary and secondary students' impromptu essays. Sex Roles , 23 , 439-469.
27. Mulac , A. , Wiemann , J.M. , Widenmann , S.J. ,& Gibson , T.W. (1988). Male/femalelanguage differences and effects in same-sex and mixed-sex dyads: The gender-linked language effect. Communication Monographs , 55 , 315-335.
28. Smith , P.M. (1985). Language, the sexes and society . Oxford: Basil Blackwell..
29. Tannen , D. (1994). Gender and discourse. . New York: Oxford University Press..
30. Theil , H. (1971). Principles of econometrics. . New York: Wiley..